Did Linoln actually "install pro union govenments"? I did not see this reflected in the link you provided.

The link says that that he took steps to encourage loyal governments and pro union sentiment, but installing implies that he selected the leaders and put them in place. As in the Webster's " to put (someone) in an official or important job". Can you cite an instance where actully installed a state govenment offical in a border state?

Section I begins: "Lincoln's border state policy blended several objectives. The first was to preserve or ESTABLISH (my caps) loyal governments in each of these states. (How Maryland became a : "Loyal" state is explained by the passage ending with Footnote 9)

The first paragraph ends with this: "In devising his border state policy, as would be true later with his Reconstruction program, Lincoln always gave first priority to placing loyal men in control of the state government.".

The first two paragraphs of that section explain his policy relative to assuring that citizens loyal to the Union ran the respective state governments. Mr. Lincoln did not have to personally select those citizens that would run the state governments. He only had to be assured that they were loyal to the Union and presumably would implement the policies that he favored, while suppressing those citizens whose loyalty might be to the other side.

You are often a staunch proponent of "accuracy" but if this is your evidence, you have overstated your point.

Lincoln’s OBJECTIVE was to establish a pro union government and his PRIORITY was to PLACE loyal union men. Of course it was! He believed that secession was illegal, and for this reason took steps to address what he considered to be treasonous activity.

But can you provide me with examples of state officials he actually INSTALLED, i.e. he actually picked and put officals in positions in state government in lieu of properly elected officials? If you can you were accurate in using the word installed, other wise you can correct your own post as you have corrected the posts of so many other forum participants.

We'll have to disagree once again over my use of the word: "Installed."

I have already showed you the source that says that Mr. Lincoln's objective was to ESTABLISH (My caps) "Loyal" governments in each of the border states.

I have already showed you the source that says that Mr. Lincoln always gave priority to PLACING (My caps) loyal men in control of each state government. In fact, in your posting #63 you even use the word: "Install" when you state that Mr. Lincoln's priority was to INSTALL (My caps) loyal Union men.

(EDITING: Mildman has edited his Post #63 to remove his own use of the word: "Install" ).

My source shows how General Banks bragged about making Maryland a : "Loyal" state by replacing those local and state officials considered to be disloyal and: "Assigning" loyal men to their duties. Those : "Replaced" (And in some cases imprisoned) included properly elected officials of the city of Baltimore, as well as members of the state legislature.

Wherever the Union Army held sway, military officers as well as: "Loyal" local and state officials could arrest anyone who uttered any word or made any gesture that they considered disloyal. Many thousands of individuals in many states were arrested throughout the war and held without the necessity of making or proving any charges.

Mr. Lincoln's minions in the border states could control who was placed in local and state government positions and intimidate those elements that might have a tendency to oppose them. Those who selected the: "Loyal" men and those who: "Installed" (My word) them were advancing the objectives of Mr. Lincoln.

I really see no point in trying to have a serious discussion of history with anyone who sees some grand design in a word coming over the TV, or in golf scores. I really see no point in trying to have a serious discussion of history with anyone who sees some grand design in everything done by anyone with the surname Johnson, which is the second most common surname in the United States.

You might have: "Frazzled" Mildman and induced me to make the mistake of pointing out your historical errors on your: "4 Score" thread, but it pleases me to see that all of the other members of the forum have thus far shown the good sense to ignore your prattle.

There were no errors in the post, just a couple of words that got tweaked. You completely ignored the revelation of "4 score and 7 years ago, our fathers..." referring to Genasis 16:16. You also completely ignored the Masonic(7,74) Code(4) of GOD=7_4, 7/4=July 4th or 7 April: the original Good Friday. You ignored the synchronisms that occurred in real time with my posts and were documented. You obviously believe in randomness and not only ignore proof of the contrary, you mock it as "prattle" and dare to speak for others who have not weighed in one way or the other. Therefore...

You have taken 'the test'. Today is your Judgment Day: you FAILED F.

And you having NOTHING to be proud of "defending Texans'" evil behavior during the Civil War!

You are now on the record for refusing to provide evidence to support your own claims. I conclude that Lincoln never INSTALLED any elected officials as you say. You taint Lincolns legacy with such wild fabrications and you diminsh your own credibilty.

And as for Lincoln's "Minions", by posting in the space we agree to show COURTESY AND RESPECT, and that certainly applies to the Civil War soldiers who served their county honorably. HOW DARE YOU CALL THEM MINIONS! Yes, even Union soldiers should be honored. They should be off limits for defamation.

You are now on record for refusing to acknowledge evidence already provided on this thread.

You object to my use of the word: "Install" when it comes to pro-Union governments in the border states. Apparently, you see no relationship to passages in the link I provided to them being ESTABLISHED there, or having them PLACED there. (See my Post #62) Perhaps the word: "Install" is somehow offensive to you.

Perhaps your objection is trying to say that Mr. Lincoln did not PERSONALLY appoint specific individuals to specific positions. But that possible objection is also addressed in my Post #62 where I stated that Mr. Lincoln did not have to select the : "Loyal men" personally. Thats what he had his subordinates to see to. I doubt that Mr. Lincoln cared who the individuals were, as long as they advanced his policies and suppressed those considered to be disloyal.

Your apparent contention that my saying that Mr. Lincoln installed pro-Union state governments through his subordinates is a : "Wild fabrication" is absurd. Your contention that saying this somehow: "Taints Lincoln's legacy" is also absurd, as should be clear to anyone who reads the link I provided.

I am once again providing the link, and inviting other members to read it so that they can decide for themselves who the real fabricator is here.

As for my use of the word: "Minion," if you had asked for a clarification of how I meant it, I would have provided it to you. Reading from my New World College Dictionary, Fourth Edition, the word is described as: "A subordinate official, deputy, or the like." This is how I meant it, but it doesn't surprise me that you choose to take it as meaning: "A servile follower," since you seem always to be looking for a reason to be insulted.

When it comes to soldiers, there are many historical examples of individuals that I have little respect for. But the idea that I would defame soldiers in general, be they Civil War soldiers on either side (They were all American soldiers to me) or soldiers now is completely ridiculous. I happen to be retired from the U.S. Army myself, and I know a thing or two about leaders and subordinates. I would be surprised if you served at all.

Mildman, as usual, you are way off base ( If not in high orbit like another poster on this thread). I wish no more exchanges with you on this forum. Do me a favor and try: "Just Testing Ideas" on someone else.

You addressed my point/question in an earlier post. You clarified that Lincoln never "personally" installed officials. That is good enough. I agree that he established a general policy to mute the voice and roles of those who were in open rebellion with the United States government.

I will try in the future not to be offended by your style of communications.

Even better would be to try to pretend that I don't exist. Don't respond to any of my postings, or refer to them. Don't mention my name or refer to it. Employ the : "Ignore Member" feature. (Something I have never ever done in more than 6 1/2 years on this forum).

Agree to this and I'll extend the same: "Courtesy and respect" to you.

Hmmm, that might help. I won't post to you anymore, but its hard not to mention an interesting topic that might be in your post. Your posts are very interesting and I appreciate the links you provide.

If I expressed myself in the following way would it have been different for you?

"I am not sure I agree with "install" as implies a very active or directive role. I have not read that Lincoln directed the placement of officials in offices reserved for elected officials. However he certainly established a policy to mute the voices of those in open rebellion to the US Government.”

I am thinking that if I modify my style it would be less combative to you.

Apparently, I'll have to settle for less than I hoped for, but that is often the situation in life.

As for the: "Install" fiasco, you could have posted: "Do you mean that Mr. Lincoln PERSONALLY selected state officials to preside over the state governments of the border states?"

My response would have been: "No, he trusted his subordinates to do that. He really didn't care who the officials were as long as they implemented his policies and suppressed those considered to be: "Disloyal."

See how easily the question could have been resolved without charges of me making: "Wild fabrications" or: "Tainting Lincoln's legacy."